This study will compare the philosophies of French writer Jean-Paul Sartre and Palestinian terrorist (or freedom fighter) Leila Khaled. The study will consider the contributions of the two to the philosophy of the person and the successes and failures of each philosophy. Neither philosophy presents any ideas which deserve greater development, because both philosophies create a world in which the individual can do whatever he or she wants to do, thereby bringing about chaos.
Sartre's existentialism is based first on the view that God does not exist. Existentialism thereby qualifies as an atheistic philosophy. However, Sartre essentially keeps the moral imperatives of religion as he goes on to construct his philosophy without God. The moral philosophy of religionists is based on the argument that God implants in every person a sense of what is right and what is wrong and that each person is guided to obey moral principles by the essence of God which is in each person. Sartre says, however, that there is no God, which leaves man without external guidance with respect to morality or behavior. However, atheism also frees man to choose for himself what to do, how to act, how to define himself. The religionist believes that "essence precedes existence." In other words, God puts the essence into man before he exists, and that essence (God-defined morality) shapes his existence. Sartre, the atheistic existentialist, believes that "existence precedes essence," which means man first exists and then, through his actions, he himself defines his essence, his meaning, purpose, identity, morality, etc. The individual creates himself as a person, in other words, according to Sartre:
What is meant here by saying that existence precedes essence? It means that, first of all, man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and only afterwards, defines himself. . . . He himself will have made what he will be. Thus, there is no human nature, since there ...